You = Hahn. Do you heavily shop Reed, Yes or No?

[greg775]

I don't know why we want to trade pitching. The goal is to get good again. To get good, we pretty much need to replace every one of our everyday position players. The pitching is fine.

If we trade all our pitchers, we may never be good again, 15-25 years.

 

The way to rebuild is get 3-4 position players through free agency for next season while keeping most of our pitching.

If you want to trade one reliever and one starter, I guess I'm OK with that. How bout trading Crain for 2 outstanding prospects and trade Peavy if anybody wants him since he can't stay healthy.

 

Repeat: Completely turn over our lineup; keep the pitchers.

[caulfield12]

I don't know why we want to trade pitching. The goal is to get good again. To get good, we pretty much need to replace every one of our everyday position players. The pitching is fine.

If we trade all our pitchers, we may never be good again, 15-25 years.

 

The way to rebuild is get 3-4 position players through free agency for next season while keeping most of our pitching.

If you want to trade one reliever and one starter, I guess I'm OK with that. How bout trading Crain for 2 outstanding prospects and trade Peavy if anybody wants him since he can't stay healthy.

 

Repeat: Completely turn over our lineup; keep the pitchers.

 

 

We're not the Royals quite yet. Or the Pirates, although they're having a a great season SO FAR.

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

I don't know why we want to trade pitching. The goal is to get good again. To get good, we pretty much need to replace every one of our everyday position players. The pitching is fine.

If we trade all our pitchers, we may never be good again, 15-25 years.

 

The way to rebuild is get 3-4 position players through free agency for next season while keeping most of our pitching.

If you want to trade one reliever and one starter, I guess I'm OK with that. How bout trading Crain for 2 outstanding prospects and trade Peavy if anybody wants him since he can't stay healthy.

 

Repeat: Completely turn over our lineup; keep the pitchers.

Greg you hit the nail on the head. The Sox aren't losing games by a lot . The Sox look like crap because the defense and hitting both have been terrible. Even with that happening we aren't getting beat bad but barely beat . Get a few guys who can both hit and play D . Even 2 or 3 more decent hitters can turn those close games into wins and those bats and defenders don't all have to come in trades especially if the trades make a lot more money available. I think with this in mind the Sox will package some players together if they can find a contending team to take a lot of salary .

 

So who will we see getting traded besides high salary guys ? Maybe some our young guys who are or will have trouble finding a true position because of their defense, aka Viciedo /De Aza. I really hope Viciedo goes on a tear and makes himself more marketable.

[ChiSox_Sonix]

No. I would listen to offers and wouldn't hesitate to trade him if the right deal came across but I would not actively pursue trade options with him.

[whitesox14]

According to baseball-ref Reed is being paid $520,000. Thornton is being paid $5.5 million. I would much rather try to unload Thornton at the trade deadline for some prospects (replace him with Webb etc.), free up some money for a FA signing now or in the offseason, and keep Reed for the pittance of a salary he currently earns. Reed has been great, he's fun to watch (#TWTW), and he's cheap.

[Balta1701]

According to baseball-ref Reed is being paid $520,000. Thornton is being paid $5.5 million. I would much rather try to unload Thornton at the trade deadline for some prospects (replace him with Webb etc.), free up some money for a FA signing now or in the offseason, and keep Reed for the pittance of a salary he currently earns. Reed has been great, he's fun to watch (#TWTW), and he's cheap.

There's a very, very good chance Thornton will be unloaded, but he will not bring back a haul in prospects because of his salary and he won't be replaced by a righty.

[caulfield12]

According to baseball-ref Reed is being paid $520,000. Thornton is being paid $5.5 million. I would much rather try to unload Thornton at the trade deadline for some prospects (replace him with Webb etc.), free up some money for a FA signing now or in the offseason, and keep Reed for the pittance of a salary he currently earns. Reed has been great, he's fun to watch (#TWTW), and he's cheap.

 

 

Well, yeah, that's kind of the point.

 

Same with Lindstrom's salary, it's only $500K, so he would be easier to trade than Matt.

 

Trading Thornton isn't really freeing up salary so much, because by the end of July, it will be only around $2 million saved....assuming we can get another team to pick up that contract (90% chance).

 

 

All the reasons you've given for keeping him are the same reasons why Reed would be attractive to other teams...the major pertinent question about trading him is the doubt whether we have someone who projects to be better than Addison in the minor leagues right now. (As was the case for "dumping" Santos after we'd just signed him to an extension, as Reed was the clear heir-apparent.)

 

There is the danger of going into 2014 with a question mark for closer, but unless they really feel they have a chance to compete in 2014...then there's not really a compelling reason to keep him IF IF IF another team makes an offer too good to refuse for a position player that's blocked on another team.

 

It just seems or feels, with the way things are currently trending...that the front office's BEST method to fix the offense right now is by trading what assets we do have...rather than spending our way through the off-season.

 

The preference should be to free ourselves from as many commitments as possible, then we can think about adding talent at the trade deadline next season (if the team's showing signs of being able to contend) or going into the 2014-15 off-season.

Edited June 24, 2013 by caulfield12

[harfman77]

According to baseball-ref Reed is being paid $520,000. Thornton is being paid $5.5 million. I would much rather try to unload Thornton at the trade deadline for some prospects (replace him with Webb etc.), free up some money for a FA signing now or in the offseason, and keep Reed for the pittance of a salary he currently earns. Reed has been great, he's fun to watch (#TWTW), and he's cheap.

 

Thats why Reed has trade value and Thornton doesn't.

 

 

I think you definitely listen when someone calls, but if you "heavily shop" him it probably hurts his value.

[harfman77]

I dont think anyone here will be happy with the package that Reed brings back, closers have not had a history of bringing back impact type players. The best comp deal for a closer recently was probably when the A's sent Bailey to the Red Sox with Ryan Sweeney for Josh Reddick, Raul Alcantara, and Miles Head. Head is the #7 prospect in the A's system according to BA. Reddick played himself to a career year last year but has regressed back to the level of a fourth OF.

[The Ultimate Champion]

First, TUC this is a great thread that I think everyone is pretty split on. I've been advocating a trade ever ssince the team crashed. However, I think it's a case-by-case situation. Gotta do it for the right package or try again in the offseason. Gotta take advantage of someone desperate if possible.

 

Also TUC, don't ruin a great thread by stating Hahn is reading it. C'mon now.

 

 

 

Anyone have a hypothesis for his K ratios here?

Probably just getting ahead with the fastball all the time, being predictable & leaving it up in the zone more, then having to use the slider to get the K. Check out the HR rate compared to SV situations. 3 HR vs. 237 batters against 6 HR vs. 170 batters, also the BB rate is a whole lot higher in SV situations than non-SV. He probably mixes things up a lot more in SV situations, also probably is more careful, whereas non-SV he's just getting the ball over the plate, leading to fewer BBs but more hard hit balls. Maybe fangraphs or something shows pitch differentials in splits. I dunno. Don't use that site, I don't have the will to calculate.

[witesoxfan]

Probably just getting ahead with the fastball all the time, being predictable & leaving it up in the zone more, then having to use the slider to get the K. Check out the HR rate compared to SV situations. 3 HR vs. 237 batters against 6 HR vs. 170 batters, also the BB rate is a whole lot higher in SV situations than non-SV. He probably mixes things up a lot more in SV situations, also probably is more careful, whereas non-SV he's just getting the ball over the plate, leading to fewer BBs but more hard hit balls. Maybe fangraphs or something shows pitch differentials in splits. I dunno. Don't use that site, I don't have the will to calculate.

 

This seems pretty much like it's on the spot. More aggressive in the zone in non-save situtations because a mistake doesn't hurt you nearly as much.

[The Ultimate Champion]

I dont think anyone here will be happy with the package that Reed brings back, closers have not had a history of bringing back impact type players. The best comp deal for a closer recently was probably when the A's sent Bailey to the Red Sox with Ryan Sweeney for Josh Reddick, Raul Alcantara, and Miles Head. Head is the #7 prospect in the A's system according to BA. Reddick played himself to a career year last year but has regressed back to the level of a fourth OF.

The Red Sox also traded David Murphy, Engle Beltre, and Kason Gabbard to the Rangers one year for a depleted Eric Gagne trying to make a comeback, who was paid well & a rental. That's kind of a good comp too if you swap Gabbard the fringey 5th starter type with a really good prospect. Beltre was a high ceiling prospect far away, Murphy was a potentially useful former 1st rounder labeled a bust, but Texas has gotten a lot of use out of him. If you do that type of deal & switch it around where the really good prospect is the headliner + the MLB-ready change of scenery player with talent who may be useful is the second guy + high ceiling kid in A ball the scouts love but is a long ways off, then that's a great format for a deal.

 

Also Reddick has regressed but let's not forget how badly the Red Sox lost on that deal. When Reddick was hitting all those HRs it looked like a massive mistake by Boston, now it just looks bad period. IMO a Reed trade can bring you as much back as Rios or Peavy, maybe more given Rios' ability to disappear & Peavy being on the DL. The chances of us trading Reed for talent and then replacing him internally have to be a ton higher than the chances of us trading either Rios or Peavy and replacing those players internally.

[caulfield12]

It's shocking that people would prefer to trade Rios over Reed.

 

 

It's all about talent return.

 

We can trade Rios and get "salary relief" but he's our best offensive player, currently.

 

We might get a couple of decent prospects, but we're not going to get any future superstars, and it's doubtful one of them would even replace Rios' offensive production in time.

 

The one thing the White Sox minor league system has done a good job of producing is relievers, as well as identifying guys like Jenks and Santos in other organizations.

 

Unless we buy at top dollar on the free agent market, we're not going to replace Rios.....and Thompson needs to be in CF to be at his highest value as a contributor at the big league level. And I won't even get started on Hawkins.

[The Ultimate Champion]

MLBTR says the Nats are an aggressive buyer.

 

They could use a SP & it looks like they could use a lefty reliever, too. Who knows their system? What do they give us for Peavy + Thornton? Anything worth trading the Jakemeister? I'm not giving him up easily.

 

Also I think Texas is a great fit for a couple of our players, and I would love to sausage slap the Tiggers in a Reed deal.

[witesoxfan]

MLBTR says the Nats are an aggressive buyer.

 

They could use a SP & it looks like they could use a lefty reliever, too. Who knows their system? What do they give us for Peavy + Thornton? Anything worth trading the Jakemeister? I'm not giving him up easily.

 

Also I think Texas is a great fit for a couple of our players, and I would love to sausage slap the Tiggers in a Reed deal.

 

Rendon would fill a monstrous void at 3B but I find it difficult that they trade him given the start he's had with them. The Sox badly want to sign Brian Goodwin when they drafted him a few years ago. He's a very Mitchell-esque player - decent power, decent speed, ability to draw a walk, strikes out like crazy. Cole and Giolito would also be nice.

 

Not sure how realistic any of that is.

[GreenSox]

I wouldn't shop him - I'd listen though. I am not sure how much he, or any of our pitchers, will have left in 2 years, the way Ventura over-pitches them.

[The Ultimate Champion]

Not sure that it has to do with this thread, but a deal sending Cliff Lee back to Texas for Elvis Andrus makes too much sense not to happen. That Andrus contract is nutty, and there's risk and money on the Lee side of things.

 

Maybe we could get involved there. Texas IIRC lost Harrison for the year & they need an OF also. Maybe there's a 3-way deal where Texas keeps Profar as thier SS, sends Andrus to Philly, and gets back Cliff Lee + Peavy or Cliff Lee + Rios. Texas & maybe Philly could send specs our way. Rollins is still under contract for a couple more years with Philly, but Young at 3B & Utley at 2B are headed for FA.

 

[Chicago White Sox]

It's shocking that people would prefer to trade Rios over Reed.

Rios has two years of team control left and should be one of the top bats available at the deadline. Moving him now makes sense if a team is willing to pay a premium for him. Not only would you be receiving young talent, but you'd also clear his salary off the books for next year.

 

Reed has four years of team control left. He's still pre-arb next year, so trading doesn't him doesn't have much of a financial impact. His value at next year's deadline should not be much less than it is right now. IMO, you might as well focus on moving Crain, Thornton, & Lindstrom righ now and reevaluate the Reed situation next year. Now, if a team makes a ridiculous offer in next 30 days you take it, but otherwise I think you're better off waiting to move him.

[Balta1701]

I can't comment on Cole or Goodwin but we are not getting Rendon or Giolito. Rendon would be one of the best prospects we could pick up though in terms of our state right now. 3B guy who could be good for a long team that isn't far off. We could dream, it's not happening though.

Then there's very little reason to move Reed. If you're moving him it ought to be for a guy you'd say "it's not happening" about.

[LittleHurt05]

Not sure that it has to do with this thread, but a deal sending Cliff Lee back to Texas for Elvis Andrus makes too much sense not to happen. That Andrus contract is nutty, and there's risk and money on the Lee side of things.

 

Maybe we could get involved there. Texas IIRC lost Harrison for the year & they need an OF also. Maybe there's a 3-way deal where Texas keeps Profar as thier SS, sends Andrus to Philly, and gets back Cliff Lee + Peavy or Cliff Lee + Rios. Texas & maybe Philly could send specs our way. Rollins is still under contract for a couple more years with Philly, but Young at 3B & Utley at 2B are headed for FA.

 

If that Andrus deal is so nutty, why in the world would Philly want to trade for it?

[Balta1701]

If that Andrus deal is so nutty, why in the world would Philly want to trade for it?

Have you seen what's left on Cliff Lee's deal?

[LittleHurt05]

Have you seen what's left on Cliff Lee's deal?

 

True, but at least that's done with by 2016. The Andrus deal goes to 2023, while that's only $15 million, not $25 mil, he still isn't much of a hitter.

[Quin]

People keep citing the White Sox history with closers, but what everyone fails to account for is that law of averages will eventually kick in there.

[caulfield12]

People keep citing the White Sox history with closers, but what everyone fails to account for is that law of averages will eventually kick in there.

 

 

Well, it definitely did with the health of the team, as soon as all the Herm Schneider/statistical outlier articles started coming out.

 

Kiss of death.

[caulfield12]

The stronger correlation is the recent trends of closers. For whatever reason, in today's baseball, if you're not Mariano Rivera or Craig Kimbrel (MAYBE Soriano and probably Chapman down the line) any good year can be your last one. The longevity is just not there.

 

EDIT: In any case, that makes little sense as an argument. You don't operate a specific way because you're afraid you're due to get screwed because you have been successful in the past.

 

 

It would be the equivalent of never taking another position player in the draft...because we've been so terrible at it over the last decade.

 

That's so counterintuitive, it's almost logical to some Sox fans.